Posted on 11/08/2004 5:26:23 PM PST by mdittmar
Sen. Arlen Specter pledged on Monday not to oppose Supreme Court nominees just because they are anti-abortion as the moderate Republican fought to keep alive his bid to head the Senate panel that oversees judicial nominations.
"Absolutely not, and it's not just what I'm saying — I have done it. I have not applied a litmus test, and have voted to confirm pro-life judges," he said in a television interview.
But conservative critics kept calling for someone other than the Pennsylvania senator to be Judiciary Committee chairman in the newly elected Congress, and other Senate Republicans said little or nothing in Specter's defense.
Specter, who favors keeping abortion legal, is in line to replace the more conservative Sen. Orrin Hatch, Republican of Utah, as chairman based on seniority.
Peterson Jury Urged to Keep an Open Mind N.J. Governor Delivers Farewell Address Moderate Senator Fights for Top Judiciary Post He angered conservatives last week by saying he thought it unlikely the newly elected Senate — even with its Republican majority expanded to 55 — would confirm a Supreme Court nominee who wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark case legalizing abortion.
The question of who wields the gavel in the Judiciary Committee is crucial. President Bush may make several nominations to the Supreme Court during his second term because Chief Justice William Rehnquist is ailing and other judges are thought to be close to retirement.
The Senate is expected to pick a chairman next week. First, the Republican members of the committee must nominate the chairman by secret ballot. Then, according to party rules, another secret ballot vote is taken by all Senate Republicans.
If they reject the committee's recommendation, the matter is sent back to committee with instructions for it to nominate someone else.
I wonder if they regret that stance yet?
Absolutley, we can't kick him out of the Senate and what if the 4 or 5 other moderates decide they don't like how Specter is treated? What if they then decide to make trouble?
We do not have enough power to go on a witch-burning spree right now.
We can't kick him out of the Senate and what if the 4 or 5 other moderates decide they don't like how Specter is treated? What if they then decide to make trouble?
We do not have enough power to go on a witch-burning spree right now.
Bingo!!!
With a heavy heart, I have to agree with you.
No. I don't buy it. There are two many ways a Chairman can drag his feet and screw things up without actively opposing a nominee we want.
Specter is not to be trusted and we would be fools to hand him a gavel.
Specter must be senile to even make such a stupid statement. I can't ever remember a nominee saying he wanted to overturn Roe.
What Specter really meant is that he would consider any nominee who is pro-life to be objectionable even if he has never expressed an opinion on Roe.
Arlie Sphincter isn't a *moderate* GOPer; Sphincter's a liberal-demokkkRAT in GOP duds.
Throw his stinking ass out!
Hi woody!
Glad you agree.
Now I know I'm right. :)
No, Specter lies and deceives. He cannot be trusted, or taken at his word. This is far too important to take a chance.
you don't know that...you fear that.
two different things.
i never said "kick him out" btw...
i said give him a bs chair or let him jump with jim.
I understand but forcing him out may be much worse for us.
We can't overplay our hand right now. We do not have enough power. Everyone is just feeling their oats over the great election. You watch, the moderates led by the Mc-He-gar troika will be out soon taking Specters side.
"We do not have enough power to go on a witch-burning spree right now."
Krauthammer on Brit's panel mentioned just this point tonight. He said it would look terrible for the party. IMHO we would look very intolerant. In other words, we'd be just like the Dems.
Did you hear Specter on Sean Hannity today?
Turned my stomach.
Get him out. NOW.
And what if he takes 3 or 4 others with him? Would that be worth it? NO!!!
Bush wanted him to win in PA, I think that is enough. He won, he is in there, I think bloodletting power plays right now will back fire on us.
I say that he should not be nominated or given the Senate Judiciary Committee chairmanship. I say that the be voted out of that spot, and if he wants to stomp his feet and pout and change over to the Democrat party, that would be just fine with me.
He can keep Jumpin' Jim Jeffords company. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Agreed, once we take his knife, he can't stab us in the back. I would be foolish to let him keep it.
it made me uncomfortable...a renegade senator is worse than a dem senator...more complicated.
sometimes W and Karl do things like CFR and Dope for the Elderly and the Education bill which make little sense to me....not to mention their pro-migra outlook.
W got zilch capital from the dope or education fundings...ditto the afican aids initiative.
W can whip the raghead savages I know and have faith there....God put him here for that first.
What he does with judicial appointments will outlive all but the youngest freepers and I see Scottish Law as standing in the way.
Yes! Looks very, very bad and Specter could really stick it to us if we do it.
Our chance was in the PA primary. We got beat. End of story.
We elected 4 new pub Senators, with a 55 to 44-1 majority we should have a four seat edge on the committee. This is what the dimwits had when they were in the same position. Let us see how this shakes itself out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.